Alexithymia and Sexual Functioning: a Study on Male Patients with Sexual Dysfunctions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Alexithymia construct characterizes individuals who have difficulty in identifying or reporting their specific emotions. Researchers have found high alexithymia levels in men with different sexual problems, including sexual dysfunctions, paraphilias and infertility. The goal of this study was to investigate the presence of alexithymia in male sexual dysfunctions (MSD), specifically Erectile Dysfunction (ED), Premature Ejaculation (PE) and Delayed Ejaculation (DE). \n \nMethods: 274 patients with MSD diagnosed by DSM-IV-TR were administered Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) and ad hoc tools (IIEF, PESI, IELT) to evaluate clinical features of sexual symptoms and the personal and relational distress connected to them. \n\t \nResults: The mean TAS-20 scores were 58.62 for patients with ED, 52.4 for them presenting PE and 45.46 for the ones with DE. Alexithymia level resulted to be correlated with ED and PE and with their severity level; no correlations were found for DE. \n \nConclusions: High alexithymia levels in ED and PE patients underline the importance of using an integrative approach in the treatment of MSD. TAS-20 scores for patients with DE, similar to the Italian normative values, stress the hypothesis that this dysfunction could be related with emotional control, yet previously found to be negatively associated with alexithymia. No difficulty in identifying and communicating emotions in this last group is probably also connected to the greater social acceptance of DE than ED and PE. As the symptom doesn’t affect the core male identity, cultural approval may be considered as an important protective factor from creating or exacerbating high levels of alexithymia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".